Yea but unlike with player contracts coaches can be fired. So if $ was not the sticking point why not give him 9 years and fire him when they feel like the team needs a leadership change. It was bizarre situation. Trotz should have been there to defend the cup.
Why didn't Trotz settle for the 3 years that was offered by the Caps? Why did he demand 5 years? I'd wager it's because he knew more likely than not that he'd never make it to the end of the contract
My comments were not directed at what Trotz demanded or did not demand. Point i was trying to make is that when your coach helps you win the SC for the time in franchise history it may not be the best idea to let him walk over contract negotiations. They should have gave him what he wanted and have him there to defend the cup. If things did not work out they could have just fired him after year one and everyone would move on. And to us as fans it really doesn't matter if Trotz demanded $5m or $50m. That money is not coming out of the teams cap so why gives a damn how much $ the coach is making.
The demands are the big sticking point though. Yes he won the cup, but like I said in one of the earlier posts in this thread there was a rumor/report after the SC run that Reirden's tactics were used after the team went down 2-0 to Columbus. He was going to be fired two different times throughout the season and never has made it out of the 2nd round other than the Caps SC. Giving 5x5 to him at that point when he had 4 years under his belt would be shitting money away. He wouldn't last that contract length. Despite what everyone around these boards think, sports franchises are run as a business and that would have been a bad business decision
